Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 23, 2025
Optimized Management of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke
Published on: January 18, 2018
Socioeconomic Inequalities in Reperfusion Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke
Sine Mette Øgendahl Buus1, Marie Louise Schmitz1, Pia Cordsen2
1Department of Neurology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark (S.M.Ø.B., M.L.S., G.A., C.Z.S.).
Background:
Reperfusion therapies (thrombolysis and thrombectomy) are of paramount importance for the recovery after ischemic stroke. We aimed to investigate if socioeconomic status (SES) was associated with the chance of receiving reperfusion therapy for ischemic stroke in a country with tax-funded health care.
Methods:
This nationwide register-based cohort study included patients with ischemic stroke registered in the Danish Stroke Registry between 2015 and 2018. SES was determined by prestroke educational attainment, income level, and employment status. Data on SES was obtained from Statistics Denmark and linked on an individual level with data from the Danish Stroke Registry. Risk ratios (RR) for receiving reperfusion therapies were calculated using univariate and multivariable Poisson regression with robust variance.
Results:
A total of 37 187 ischemic stroke patients were included. Low SES, as defined by education, income and employment status, was associated with lower treatment rates. The socioeconomic gradient was most pronounced according to employment status, with intravenous thrombolysis rates of 23.7% versus 15.8%, and thrombectomy rates of 5.1% versus 2.8% for employed versus unemployed patients. When the analyses were restricted to patients with timely hospital arrival, and adjusted for age, sex and immigrant status, low SES according to income and employment remained unfavorable for the likelihood of receiving intravenous thrombolysis: adjusted RR, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.86-0.95) for low versus high income, and adjusted RR, 0.77 (95% CI, 0.71-0.84) for unemployed versus employed patients. Similarly, low SES according to income and employment status remained unfavorable for the likelihood of receiving thrombectomy: adjusted RR, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.72-0.95) for low versus high income and adjusted RR, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.53-0.88) for unemployed versus employed patients.
Conclusions:
Socioeconomic inequalities in reperfusion treatment rates among ischemic stroke patients prevail, even in a country with tax-funded universal health care.
